<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1999 (9) TMI 929 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160326</link>
    <description>Excise duty paid by a purchaser or dealer on behalf of the manufacturer was treated as part of the sale consideration and was includible in the manufacturer&#039;s total turnover for sales tax purposes, because the duty remained primarily the manufacturer&#039;s liability even if payment was routed directly to the Government for convenience. Revisional jurisdiction under the statute was confined to orders of subordinate officers, so an Appellate Deputy Commissioner&#039;s order could not be revised by an authority of equivalent rank. The turnover issue was answered against the assessee, while the revisional order was held to be without jurisdiction and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2013 12:48:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339431" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 929 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160326</link>
      <description>Excise duty paid by a purchaser or dealer on behalf of the manufacturer was treated as part of the sale consideration and was includible in the manufacturer&#039;s total turnover for sales tax purposes, because the duty remained primarily the manufacturer&#039;s liability even if payment was routed directly to the Government for convenience. Revisional jurisdiction under the statute was confined to orders of subordinate officers, so an Appellate Deputy Commissioner&#039;s order could not be revised by an authority of equivalent rank. The turnover issue was answered against the assessee, while the revisional order was held to be without jurisdiction and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>